-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Germany's far-right AFD would be second largest party in newest poll
- Thread starter Kyougar
- Start date
Get out of here with that shit. Seriously. What the fuck. Other videos by that channel: "Sieg Heil, Boy!", "Party in der Judenhöhle" (Party in the Jew cave).
Not to mention the channel's name. 18 and 88 are a number codes used by (neo-)Nazis.
Are people still telling the fairy tale of the Agenda 2010 being the SPD's downfall?
Come on now... The reason is simple but you still won't like it: The SPD is - or at least was - a workers' party. And those workers just aren't that much into "refugees welcome" as the SPD leadership. Simple as that. Just look at former SPD strongholds in the East and which party those vote for nowadays.
With the CSU being a big pile of shit right now I think I'll vote for the Green party this fall, just for the lolz.
Come on now... The reason is simple but you still won't like it: The SPD is - or at least was - a workers' party. And those workers just aren't that much into "refugees welcome" as the SPD leadership. Simple as that. Just look at former SPD strongholds in the East and which party those vote for nowadays.
With the CSU being a big pile of shit right now I think I'll vote for the Green party this fall, just for the lolz.
True. Before the AfD, Die Linke had procetually the most racists voters.
The wave of right wing politics is not a coincidence. Its whiplash. Left will need to reevaluate our ideas and see if they actually make sense to everyone. It's possible that the left pushed to far to fast.
Merkel should never have made the refugee situation as big as it is. If the numbers were the same but media coverage was different I doubt most people would have cared.
Merkel should never have made the refugee situation as big as it is. If the numbers were the same but media coverage was different I doubt most people would have cared.
We almost do that step by step.
During the nine-day meeting, delegate after delegate rose to express sympathy for the refugees. But most countries, including the United States and Britain, offered excuses for not letting in more refugees.
The Evian Conference was held in 1938.
https://www.ushmm.org/outreach/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007698
OP
OP
LINKE could be such a good working class/underpriviliged party with a social agenda if they just fucking abandon their international views. They could be a 20+% party.
They're literally Nazis.
AfD is just home to regular racists like Gauland and Maier.
OP
OP
Those "former SPD strongholds" are the most likely to be negatively affected by Agenda2010. This is not a fairy tale. SPD abandoned the working class in Schröder's years and was the Yes-men for the CDU thereafter. Every poor person feels the negative results of Agenda 2010. The "success" of this Agenda is strapped on the misery of the poor.
I find it fucking disgraceful that so many vote AFD, but I also know who to blame, and it is not the poor.
Democracy can only function with a healthy middle and low class.
OP
OP
Without Merkel, CDU will go into far-right territory. There is no-one in the pipeline who could win the CDU base that is left-centrist like Merkel. Under Merkel, the CDU was the most left-leaning it ever was as a party that is mostly centrist-right.
When parties have those sort of views its very likely that money is involved behind the scenes like with the US GOP.
This is a dumb take. The very recent uprising of the AfD by a few points can probably be attributed to Seehofer and the CSU, they've been doing the AfDs work for them in the last weeks.
What exactly is insane about the immigration policies? Last time I checked Germany signed the Geneva Refugee Convention.
And it should be abundantly clear by now that the problem here is a failure of the EU as a whole to prepare for this and now three years later still don't have solutions. That's where things need to be done, not that reversal you apparently want with Germany sending people back they are obligated to take in.
Last edited:
Gauland is very much a Nazi. So are Björnd Höcke and Beatrix von Storch.
It's also bullshit to call the AfD Merkel's legacy, they started off as an Anti-Europe party and were already gaining a lot of traction before they instrumentalized the Refugee Crisis. They basically took the more rightwing people of the FDP and turned themselves into a far right pseudo Neolib nightmare.
Same exact thing you see in the US, the White Working Class (no college education) is also the most racist subset of white voters.
Zero surprise. As a former SPD voter I knew this was going to happen rather sooner than later, because SPD has become a joke and CDU + CSU is an ever bigger shit-show. People want Merkel out of office, that's it. If things don't change I won't even vote next time or vote for some 0.3% party.
Nah, it seems to me you don't like the real and simple reason. Saying it's because of the refugee crisis ignores that SPD was in shambles long before that and indeed because of their completely failed social politics ie "agenda 2010" and "hartzVI" just because it may not have affected you (much) doesn't mean people forgot about it.
I know people that are pretty well off, always voted SPD and now vote CDU/CSU and that has exactly zero to do with "refugees" get real, even if you for some reason don't like the fact.
The SPD was simply killed by lobbyism, Schröder wasn't a social democrat, and he led the country with a *very* profit oriented mindeset.
Not everything the SPD did under him was bad, but Agenda 2010 was a very flawed concept. Not *quite* as bad as some people (especially the right wing) would like to paint it, but it was bad PR, and needed some serious overworking. That said, I tend to not take anyone seriously who calls it "Hartz IV" in a debate, because it just reeks of media-painted "knowledge" of the topic.
The SPD's biggest problem, is that there has been no proper leading figure since Schröder and Müntefehring left, they're very comparable to the current Democrats in America.
And let's not even get started by the SPD being a core part of weapon sales to Turkey.
Not everything the SPD did under him was bad, but Agenda 2010 was a very flawed concept. Not *quite* as bad as some people (especially the right wing) would like to paint it, but it was bad PR, and needed some serious overworking. That said, I tend to not take anyone seriously who calls it "Hartz IV" in a debate, because it just reeks of media-painted "knowledge" of the topic.
The SPD's biggest problem, is that there has been no proper leading figure since Schröder and Müntefehring left, they're very comparable to the current Democrats in America.
And let's not even get started by the SPD being a core part of weapon sales to Turkey.
Merkel's take on the refugee crisis coming to bite her in the ass. Looking at the numbers, it does seem kind of crazy- look at how many refugees Canada, the US and the UK took in, and this is with relatively "liberal" (or at the very least centrist) governments under Trudeau, Obama and Cameron respectively. Of course Germany has the unfortunate circumstance of being on the same land mass as Syria, but still Germany seems to have slacked off (or intentionally forgone) in the vetting and pragmatic polices these other aforementioned countries engage in. Speaking for just Canada even under "nice guy Trudeau" the background checks and vetting process is notoriously (and appropriately) thorough and intense, so much so that we do not even admit single men- the only way adult male Syrian refugees can get in is by being in a family.
Political frustration is by far the biggest contribution to this. When the pirates were new, they got a immense 10%+ as a new party, because people were sick of it back then as well. AfD is that "new" thing to shake things up, because there is not much the other parties are offering that leads to anything. "Not being the AfD" is not enough for many, to vote CDU or SPD. Of course, it's undeniable that the refuge crisis also plays a big role and bigots gonna be bigots, but that's not the sole reason.
The best remedy to this situation would be a modern new party that doesn't destroy itself like the pirates did.
The best remedy to this situation would be a modern new party that doesn't destroy itself like the pirates did.
I honestly don't understand what you're trying to say here. Thousands of refugees and immigrants died in the mediterranean sea before 2015, the problem only got worse once the borders were "opened" by Merkel. If anything it's sort of hypocritical that she never thought about picking refugess up where they come from instead of what looks like "if you make it alive here, you're welcome".
But that's different. Canada vets them in camps over in Jordan, Lebanon, etc. and resettles them, refugees don't come directly to Canada as it's harder to reach. If they make the journey and claim asylum in the EU, you can't just turn them away because they're single men. That would be violating the convention, pretty sure.
The EU as a whole should have made preparations for that kind of approach years before 2015.
That's not a great policy. They are fleeing war, it shouldn't matter which gender they are.
In an ideal world, no, you're right- but with an only limited amount of refugees that we are willing to take in, I think pragmatically its a good policy because by prioritizing women, children and families we are taking in the most vulnerable AND we are accounting for potential risks for radicals (as studied have shown young men have the largest potential to be recruited), thus gaining refugees who are more likely to integrate.
The SPD needs someone who can do Rampensau. A populist who can appeal to the party base. There is no one left who can do this after Gerd and Münte left the spotlight. I have never met a person who thought Scholz or Nahles would make a good candidate.
Exactly, this uprising problem was know for appr. 20 years with the media repediately telling us that there will be millions of refugees from Africa in the years to come but it was always treated like a low priority topic comparable to global warming. Then in 2015 Merkel opened the floodgates to see what happens with no real plan.
Well to be fair there was no choice in "opening the floodgates" at the time really, alternative would have been asylum seekers dying at the border due to approaching winter.
That it even came to that situation is shameful.
No one is really talking about them anymore. They have been overshadowed.
User Banned (3 Days): A pattern of inflammatory generalizations about immigrants and asylum-seekers
If people are really fleeing a war they would have been relieved to stay in the first safe country on their travels. But in this case we see people traveling thousands of miles across multiple country borders to reach the European countries with the most generous welfare programs. What we're seeing is not desperate people fleeing war, but asylum seekers in safe countries who see an opportunity to emigrate to western/northern Europe, and economic migrants who think they can make use of the immigration chaos to stay in Europe under false pretenses. Most of these people, both actual asylum seekers and economic migrants, are unemployable in modern European societies because they lack education and diplomas. These people are a huge burden on our welfare system and it will get worse the more people arrive. Far better to financially support solutions that allow real war refugees to find shelter in neighboring countries. Economic migrants should be returned to their home countries as fast as possible.
I can see the logic in your first point and think i can agree with it even if i don't like it. Your second point seems to be completely driven by fear though. Sure, men are at a much higher risk of being radicalized but those are still very small numbers and i don't think justify the harshness of this policy.
I don't agree, neither the Syrian civial war nor the whole Isis thing nor Taliban comeback started in 2015. As you've said before EU and US needed a marshal plan for the middle east post "war against terrorism" and Arabian spring. EU should've paid North African states to take in refugees and could've still picked up a healthy amount from there. Greece is in great debt and for many refugees it was their first stop on their way further into Europe...why the scummy deal with Turkey? Why didn't the EU pay Greece to create those anchor centres in return for paying off a huge chunk of their debt?
The OP lack a lot of informations to be relevant enough for a proper debate
-What's the turnout here ?
-Where are the details on demographics ?
-SPD and AFD are within the margin of error with that kind of sample. Ther's not true second or third party there.
Also what's the turnout ?
-There are no new elections coming so that kind of survey out of a campaign isn't very relevant (especially without details and context)
-What's the turnout here ?
-Where are the details on demographics ?
-SPD and AFD are within the margin of error with that kind of sample. Ther's not true second or third party there.
Also what's the turnout ?
-There are no new elections coming so that kind of survey out of a campaign isn't very relevant (especially without details and context)
It's significantly harder to keep them all out when there's a sizeable land border between us and MENA and there's millions of people walking across it. We simply didn't think this would occur, we didn't even have a proper EU border force until last year.
Then you'd get furious Greeks claiming the Germans are blackmailing them. Besides, many North African countries don't want to deal with this shit either - the only reason arrivals from Libya have dropped is because we're paying militia groups to stop them.
I'm totally with you on the Marshall plan idea though.
Ignoring radicalisation for a moment, young single men are more prone to violence, especially when crammed together with nothing to do. Accepting families first is a much better idea. They stabilise communities. It's why stopping spousal reunification is a dumb idea.
They had a Rampensau in Schulz. Didn't get them anywhere.
That your argument conflates asylum seekers and normal immigrants is pretty telling. It doesn't matter whether asylum seekers are unemployable (which is also a statement without much behind it, as German numbers and projections show that every fourth refugee has a job and every second will have one in five years), if they have a legit asylum claim, they're protected under the Geneva convention, whether they saw actual bombs fall or just lived in dangerous vicinity.
lots of migrants who arrive in Portugal end up packing their bags immediately for a richer country like Spain or France.
if they were really fleeing for survival, they wouldn't look continuously upgrading towards the richest country in the Union, (Germany)
